Friday, 24 May 2013

It seems that "Swedes" have been rioting for 5 days. Yes those laid-back, fun-loving, liberal, social democratic, anti-racist "Swedes" have been burning cars, smashing windows, attacking kindergartens and suchlike!

Who'd have thought "Swedes" would be so vindictive?

I mean I can't imagine this has anything to do with immigration or multi-culti as we were told (back in the 70s and 80s) that the UK was letting in millions of Third World immigrants because "we" had an empire. The last time I looked the Swedish empire only took in a few European countries...

or is it that we were told a huge porky pie to excuse letting in millions of unwanted immigrants and the people rioting in Sweden aren't European or Swedes. That can't be so surely?

Oh the Tories will say they are changing immigration - but they can't because of the EU, asylum and 'ooman rights.

They say they will get tough on prisoners: but they can't, same reasons.

They will promise some vague referendum on the EU: but they won't deliver - as before.

So there will be no change.

UKIP are picking up Old Tory and Old Labour votes. Yet the Tories could do a few simple things to appeal to both (kind of):

Drop "gay" marriage. It's a waste of time and money. Only appeals to the New left, extreme socialists and 0.1% of the population that are homosexual (and even some of them don't want it).

Promise a referendum next year, and say they'll vote against it. With the Eurozone in freefall this is hardly revolutionary.

Stop employing public schoolboys and defending the rights of utility big business to charge what they want when people are borrowing money to buy food. That smacks of the "nasty party" image.

Stop gay marriage, EU referendum (next year) and helping the people in hard times -- not that difficult really, and I even think such things would appeal to the "middle ground" the Tories seem to love.

But none of this will happen as the Tories are sold out to a minority of extreme queers, the corrupt EU juggernaut , and the mega-rich who are screwing the rest of us.

So the Tories deserve to die the death of a thousand cuts: slow and painful. They won't be missed as they have conserved nothing except injustice, sexual immorality and greed.

Wednesday, 10 April 2013

Satanism and its Allies, the booklet, was published in 1998, some 15 years ago!

Yet still the threat to Nationalism exists from Occultist weirdoes and those who pervert something positive and imbued with love of land, into something of a caricature, something negative, hateful and even flirting with those whose ideals are the exact opposite of ours (see the original booklet for details of Jewish Satanists), including anarchists.

This update went out shortly after the booklet, and thus is out of date too.

But given that the book was a best-seller and this update only went out to a few people, we thought it made sense to put it online.

The groups, names and people may change or may not. But the lessons should be known. Nationalists must be alert!

Friday, 22 March 2013

Swansea Marxists have got their knickers in a twist over a mere internet rumour...

They published this piece of nonsense about people converging on Swansea from all across the world for a White Pride march.

Gullible?

Either they are too stupid to ignore internet gossip, or they found it useful to get more students to wave lolly pop placards against the "evil narzees"

One 'good point well made' in the report was put over by one brave soul saying that no-one would bat an eye for a Black Pride rally (probably lots held by the Marxists...) yet White Pride becomes the work of the devil???

Tuesday, 19 March 2013

Today I picked up an old copy of Spearhead (#357), and flicking in through it I found the article in which Nick Griffin stabbed his erstwhile TP comrades in the back in order to assure John Tyndall and others that he was loyal to the BNP... and we all know how that sorry tale ended: Tyndall kicked out, and Nick able to fleece the BNP membership (materially and ideologically) for many years.

Aside from all manner of outright lies and twisted facts ('twas ever thus) one gem sticks out, which was easy to overlook back then in 1998 amidst the countless then-current lies of the bi-partisan party political smear piece.

On writing about the French FN's "black and Arab members" and their "Circle of French National Jews" he adds that all this is "something the BNP will never emulate as long as I have a say in the matter."

What an almighty fib.

He had to oust JT in an acrimoniousness leadership bid before he could let Asians and others join, write for their paper, and be used to show the BNP was... well non-racist, pro-Israeli - it all very much depends which BNP publication you read, at which time, and pivoted to which audience. This all drove the grass roots away, but whilst the shekels rolled in, the BNP leader was as happy as a pig in the proverbial.

All this ideological shifting and pouring salt in the soup, by the bucketload, happened not only whilst Mr Griffin 'had a say,' but under his stewardship as leader.

Monday, 18 March 2013

This sums up Socialism: social control, mind-numbing work, death-centred society, family undermined...

Labour, Tories or Lib Dems: they all follow this agenda whilst they argue over the level of obscene debt they have is in hock to the banksters, and whether we should be taxed to the eye-balls or the eye-brows.

Thursday, 24 January 2013

Afghanistan: unwinnable and stupid war against people previously backed by CIA, with no link to 911. Corrupt pro-Western govt. put in place with links to heroin trade.Iraq: unjustifiable and stupid war against a people with no link to 911 who kept "Islamicists" in check. Chaos created in which 'terrorists' multiply.Libya: unjustifiable and stupid war against a people who fought "Islamicists" and kept them in check. Chaos ensues in which "Islamicists" (our erstwhile allies in the war, armed and trained by CIA etc) turn on Europeans, and spread war southwards.Syria: unjustifiable and stupid war in which rebels are armed and trained by CIA etc. to bring chaos to an anti-Zionist country which had kept "Islamicists" in check.Mali: Civil War amplified by "Islamicists" trained and armed by CIA in Libya, drawing in the French (and UK/USA as in Libya).Saudi Arabia: Extremist Muslim dictatorship from which most of the "911 suspects" came from which supresses its people. No war.Israel: Extremist, racist, genocidal state which breaks international law with impunity and has broken untold UN resolutions. Its agents were stopped in NYC on 911 with traces of explosives on them. No war.

One is tempted to think that the reason the CIA et al went into Libya, as well as to bring down an anti-Zionist and anti-usury nation, was to help 'Muslim extremists' there spread their agenda across North Africa and so create another, new chapter for their 'War on Terror' and so ensure money keeps flowing into the military big businesses, Zionist pressure groups and similar.

If all this confuses you, ask yourself this one question:

IF THE MAIN JUSTIFICATION FOR THE 'WAR ON TERROR' IS TO FIGHT 'MILITANT ISLAM' why oh why then have "the West" armed, trained and helped those very same Islamicists in Libya since the 1980s, and in Syria since the Civil War began?IF THE MAIN JUSTIFICATION FOR THE 'WAR ON TERROR' IS FOR REVENGE ON 911 why oh why then have the states with the strongest links, Saudi Arabia and Israel still retained the status as America's greatest allies.
It all has the stench of Orwell's Big Brother lying to us.

Even a cursory look at the geo-political alliances, adventures and objectives should make you realise that we are being lied to on a grand scale!

Wednesday, 26 December 2012

When circa 0.2% of people are in 'civil partnerships' why on earth is David Cameron trying to "legalise" (sic) homosexual marriage.

The millennial institution of marriage will be undermined and further wrecked by this, and a damn site more people are married and will see the sanctity and history of the lifelong commitment they have undertaken wrecked by a millionaire playing silly politics with society.

Meanwhile socialists and liberals say the 'War on Drugs' (NB: there is no war, drugs are all but legal in many circumstances) should be solved by making drugs more freely available. They also say (with nary a glimmer of contradiction) that the gun problem in America (and here) should be solved by restricting guns.

Of course with the vast majority of gun crime in America, as with much of the gun crime in our own cities, the lefties/liberals overlook certain, shall we say, cultural influences and backgrounds. With guns we must blame the guns, with drugs we must not blame the drugs.

And so we have a society wherein tiny, degenerate minorities hold sway over the many. If it is a case of, as they say, "as long as they love each other" and "who can deny people who wish to show commitment" etc. - then why not brother and sister, father and son or indeed husband and wives (e.g. it could be "racist" to deny Hindoos) or a 20 year old man and a 12 year old boy (or 9 year old as Peter Tatchell publicly said he was in favour of)?

After all, who are you (bigot!) to deny people who love each other and wish to show lifelong commitment to each other (even though liberals have wrecked even that notion with easy divorce).

Equally we have a society in which the true nature of street, knife and gun crime is overlooked (so politicians can drone on about how immigration has "enriched" us - in reality it has enriched big business who use it to undercut our wages), but drug crime is encouraged via liberal laws. Presumably burglary is so commonplace and rarely solved, that the solution is to legalise that?

Nuts? Well not so long ago it would have been nuts to talk about legalising drugs or "gay marriage."

P.S. When the homosexuals won the right to 'civil partnership' they and the politicians told us that was all they wanted - they would not demand 'gay marriage.' We were lied to. Let this be a lesson for all: the more you give, the more they demand. If they get "gay marriage" it will not only further destroy marriage, it will mean worse to come in the years ahead (perhaps as outlined in homosexual leader Peter Tatchell's pro-paedophile letter to The Guardian in 1997).

Tuesday, 25 December 2012

“THE great majority of people will go on observing forms that cannot be explained; they will keep Christmas Day with Christmas gifts and Christmas benedictions; they will continue to do it; and some day suddenly wake up and discover why.”

Tuesday, 23 October 2012

We also need the freedom for White footballers to say "stuff you" to the 'Kick it Out' campaign and tell them where to stick their silly t-shirts, without being fined by the person who runs the FA, Bernstein!

John Terry was found not guilty by a court. The FA still found him guilty because the word "black" is unacceptable (the words f###### and c### are acceptable because they are used on pitches every week and not one player is fined for them). The FA say regardless of context, the world "black" is a crime as far as they are concerned.

Yet big corporations out there make millions out of gansta rap acts who use the "N-word" (are we so lily livered that we can have the word f### and all sorts of swear words and blasphemies thrown at us on TV after 9pm and on every football pitch at 3pm, yet we have to call it the "N-word" to avoid persecution).

So gangsta rappers and whiggers can use the N-word ad infinitum, yet to use the word black is worth a huge fine to the FA, regardless of context?

The sooner we get a White Footballers Association to protect White players against this kind of pc nonsense the better! The FA should not bend the rules and overturn/ignore the law of the land simply because the man in the dock is White.

Or would they fine/ban a gangsta rap team player from calling "yo n###a pass me da ball?" to a team-mate, when it offends no-one?

Thursday, 4 October 2012

So Ed Milliband is just a 'normal guy'? Kind of reminds me of Tony Blair - remember his "I'm a straight kinda guy" b.s.?

It's Conference Season and all the parties are out spinning, lying and spreading the b.s. pretty thick.

NuLab (One Nation Lab?!?), Tories (Green Cons???) and Lib Dems - none of them can be believed. All of them lie. Whoever takes over next time the same old agendas will be followed: more faggot rights; more Zionist war; more money to financiers; more cuts to public services.

Any party that says it will do any different is lying. They are lying to grab your vote. They are lying to con simpletons.

All the Tory/NuLab/LibDem leaders are posh; all went to posh schools; all come from monied backgrounds; all favour betraying our country; all favour rights for homosexuals and undermining marriage; all want to bash our Christian heritage and all will keep the floodgates open to Third World immigrants

The sad thing is that, at the moment, nationalism is no position to offer any alternative as many years ago. The BNP sold out years ago. The EDL is in the pockets of the usual crowd.

The state know they can buy off nationalism by offering its leaders crumbs from the table; they also know they have enough plants and stooges in nationalism to rip it apart at the drop of a hat.

We're in a perfect storm. Corrupt MPs; corrupt coppers; corrupt media; corrupt bankers - the whole rotten system has been shown to be rotten and the people are sick of them all! Yet still nationalism rots. Voters are turning to UKIP!

Nationalism was betrayed some years back when the BNP turned into a one-issue party (on Muslims) when it could have built an ideological base with a legion of members educated on banking, family issues, nationalist economics etc.: but as it all became about muzzie-bashing and grubbing for money - it lost its heart and soul, it lost the trust of its activists: so now there is a 'perfect storm' the BNP is left (politically) rudderless and out of its depth, pushed aside by a right-wing Tory style UKIP mopping up the angry and betrayed voters.

It's very much a tale of what could have been...

Over 10 years ago Third Positionists put out a leaflet saying why the BNP were wrong to support the (Zionist) war in Afghanistan. Those days seem like a lifetime ago (many lifetimes ago if you are doing a body count), yet the mess this country is in and the pitiful results for nationalism can be traced back to those days.

We live in an age of betrayed ideologies and politicians in it for themselves. The sad thing is that thanks to the BNP, people think that nationalists are exactly the same and just another bunch of the same liars and thieves as the Westminster shysters.

Saturday, 8 September 2012

Does anyone really think that the killing of an Iraqi family on holiday in France was a "family dispute?"

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO - read British spooks) started pushing the line that it was a family dispute almost immediately (shades of JFK there).

To my unprofessional eye this looks like a hit job that was disturbed. The spooks have been known to use third parties to carry out hits from a distance (such as Islamic terrorists against Qaddafi many years ago, or even organised crime outfits). There may even have been a crossover with the CIA or Mossad - for whatever reason.

Thursday, 6 September 2012

In the news today a judge is getting stick for calling burglary of a home an act of "courage."

From what I've heard it's clear that the burglar, who burgled three homes, was on drugs at the time.

A solicitor on Radio 5 this morning said that most of the burglars he defended were on drugs or doing it out of desperation to get drugs.

So what's the common link here Poindexter? Drugs!

As I wrote recently, there is no war on drugs. Illegal, Class A drugs are freely available in our towns, cities and villages. The state seems to not want to stamp out drugs, the pushers, the gangs and the spooks behind the drugs cartels.

If we want to wipe out the vast majority of burglaries (and shop lifting) then we have to wipe out the usage and dependency on hard drugs. This is for the Common Good - and out of charity of those hooked on these evil substances.

The problem is that too many lawyers, MPs, bankers and the elite in this country are users themselves. They don't want to take action as they use various drugs. The Guardian and The Independent regularly campaign for liberalising drug laws. The Guardian sells more copies in the BBC than any other newspaper!

The media, politicians, elites etc. may make occasional noises about clamping down on drugs, but this phony war has been going on for decades.

Hard drugs like heroin ruin lives and communities. There needs to be real zero tolerance. Personally I would like to see capital punishment brought in for the pushers of hard drugs. Trace the importers and the cartels. Smash those who profit on misery. And if foreign agencies are involved in the couriering of drugs, then target them too!

There needs to be a real war on drugs. The young especially need to be offered hope - not degradation, oblivion and a futile existence. Sticks and carrots. Wipe out the drugs gangs, help the poor unfortunates.It really is that simple.

Either we believe in a better society and the rule of law; or we believe in anarchy, amorality, crime and dysfunction.

So we have no say, no choice and the usual crowd of Islingtonite Guardianistas push the agenda against what most people want AND against our traditions and the common good.

But wait! The Tories announced a discussion on it and asked for feedback didn't they?

Well, yes and no. They ignored the input of anyone opposed to their madness and said they would push ahead with overturning MILLENNIA of law, regardless of what people said!

Democracy?

People often say 'the Law is an ass.'

We might now say 'Democracy is an arse.'

What the people want, what our traditions dictate, what the common good demands and what common sense makes clear: all this is to be overturned on the altar of political correctness to give "rights" to morally corrupt, sexually deviant and mentally unhinged minority of a minority.

Tuesday, 14 August 2012

I usually watch Newsnight. I know it's not going to expose the Bilderbergers or actually inform its viewers of why we are taxed to the eyeballs to pay billionaires who create 'money' out of thin air, but every now and then something will pop up that makes you think. It's useful to listen to whilst working of an evening, if only to cringe at politicians being politicians or to hear the latest PC Islingtonista diatribe against racism, sexism, homophobia or whatever else they decide to label normality.

Anyway, last Friday I was out and about painting the town non-red, and so I missed Newsnight for the first time in a while. I realised something was up as the Twatteratti on Twitter were foaming at the mouth again, which is usually a sign that something interesting as happened (it's a benchmark that whatever the chattering classes and incoherent immigrant-offspring fodder that make up the loudest section of Twitter are railing against is half-decent). So it was they were shrieking against Peter Hitchens (and not for the first time by any stretch of the imagination).

So today I looked up Friday's Newsnight to watch it. It was centred around a piece that is going to air later in the year on BBC3 by the "comedian" and actor Russel Brand, all about his addiction to drugs.

Interestingly he argues that the only way to beat drugs is to say no. Addicts must do cold turkey and just come off the drugs. End of. No drugs at all. Sounds sane. People who talk about teenage pregnancy and abortion in America in a similar vein are roundly attacked by liberals who think the way to stop pregnancy/abortion is to throw condoms at schoolkids. They fail to realise that promoting "safe sex" merely promotes sexual activity, which in turn leads to more teenage pregnancies and more abortions!

Similarly with drugs, the liberals, chattering classes, intelligible immigrant offspring ("innit") and the Guardianistas are keen to promote "soft" drugs. They think it's fine and dandy to pop a pill at a rave, smoke a bit of weed etc. But entering the world of drugs means drugs become acceptable, and the rise in use in soft drugs goes hand in hand with the rise in use of hard drugs (just as the rise in use of condoms goes hand in hand with a rise in use of abortuaries).

Like telling an alcoholic that it's fine to sup a Pale Ale, or down an 'alcopop' it is wrong to tell impressionable kids and should-know-better 20 and 30 somethings that somehow a spliff or a pill are just fine and dandy. Yet that is exactly what this "freedom of choice" society does. The mantra is that "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone" etc. etc. ignoring the fact that hard drugs do hurt people -- they lead to ruination, lost jobs, destroyed families, damaged communities, ransacked houses etc. etc. Drug use is not a victimless crime!

Of course the homosexual deathstyle is awash with drugs, but what else would you expect from people who choose a 'life' that opts for multiple (often anonymous or semi-anonymous) "partners," casual sex in public places, even disgusting public toilets, and often leads to the ingestion of faeces and 101 varieties of disease of which AIDS is merely the most public.

It won't be long before pointing out simple facts like these is made illegal because it "promotes hatred" -- in reality ignoring the truth promotes hatred because it allows the impressionable, the weak willed, the mentally disturbed or the sexually deviant to get involved in a death-style that is rife with drugs, violence, disease and a greater chance of an early death. But I digress.

One point where Brand is totally wrong is that he thinks, in order to help rather than tar drug users, drugs should be decriminalised. Of course this is wrong because if something is made officially "OK" rather than just OK to readers of the Guardian and the Independent, it will lead to wider use. To think otherwise is arrant nonsense. The market dictates under Capitalism. If corner shops can make money selling drugs - they will! Under the counter, not on display (like cigarettes) whatever, once it is available it will be bought and used by kids. £5, £10 or £20 hits for a night of oblivion in your front room, down the park, wherever - kids would do it. Better than a bottle of vodka or a few bottles of cider, that would be the mindset of kids out to get blotto. And soon enough we would have more users and more addicts. The profiteers might be Boots the Chemist, Abdul in the corner shop or a giant pharmaceutical corporation, rather than a local gang with knives and guns: but the end result would be the same.

There is only one way to beat drugs, just as there is only one way to beat mugging, rape, homosexuality, paedophilia: zero tolerance. Pussyfooting around leads to these social evils growing on the periphery, sneaking in and gaining ground however they can.

There is no 'war on drugs' - a term abused by the CIA and others who are themselves involved in the drugs trade, profit from it and feed those profits into black ops, shady wars and more human suffering. On the ground, in our towns and cities there is no war on drugs. If there were there could be regular urine tests at work or at the dole office, there could be sniffer dogs outside nightclubs, there could be a real clampdown on the terror gangs who bring violence and intimidation to our streets.

No-one wants to live in a police state, and I think the more we can keep the government and police out of our daily lives the better. But in a country wherein I can be stopped and fined for not wearing my seat belt (which I sometimes wear, sometimes don't) yet someone with a spliff in their pocket can be stopped and merely cautioned... well you have to wonder why?

Time and again politicians tell us that their number one priority is the safety of our people. They use those excuses for planning and executing illegal wars and murdering thousands in other countries. Yet because drugs gangs bring violence, terror, intimidation, misery, robbery and other crime to our streets - where are the politicians slogans about protecting the people when it comes to dealing with the vermin who push drugs? The politicians clearly have no regard for the safety of our people - either the kids who get hooked on drugs, or the victims of the crime they regularly turn to to pay for their habits.

If we wish to stamp out drugs then let us really stamp them out. We can educate children that drugs are wrong and illegal. We can stamp out the drugs gangs and get them off the streets. We create a mindset of rejection, and at the same time we actively prevent the circulation of drugs so that even the tiny minority who wish to wilfully break the law and seek out illegal drugs, cannot get them (which in reality helps them!)

If we really care about the addicts, if we really care about the victims of crime, if we really care about decimated communities, and if we really care about the future of England and the Celtic nations, then we need to be serious about opposing drugs.

Of course don't expect any answers from the government. The secret state gets a large chunk of money from the international cartels; a good proportion of MPs, bankers etc. are busy snorting for Britain! The reality is that they do not care about violence on the streets, crime, the safety of the law-abiding majority.

Let us treat drugs as truly criminal instead of tipping it the wink, otherwise (like homosexuality) there will be a drip, drip of media brainwashing, liberal propaganda in schools and before we know if casual drug abuse will be widely culturally accepted (as it already is in certain sections of society).

It's all about what we want for our children and the future of our nations... liberal chaos and amorality, or sanity, safety and security.

Sunday, 5 August 2012

Last night on Twitter 101 varieties of multi-culti were foaming at the mouth and chewing the carpet. What was the focus of their ire? "racists."

They said things around the fact that a "ginger" a "mixed-race" and a "Muslim immigrant" had won golds should silence the "racists."

Really? As I suspected this is just bread and circuses to keep the sheeple focused on meaningless trinkets and not on the financial black hole the Lab-Con governments have put us into.

Our people are taxed to the eyeballs and left without services just to feed an endless hole of never ending debt to internationalist financiers with no loyalty to GB (state or team!) and certainly not to the peoples of these isles. The poor are robbed not only to pay for the Olympics, but (many times worse) to line the pockets of billionaire and trillionaire financiers.

As for those who say a few medals make multi-culti OK; tell that to those who lost their homes, businesses and lives in last year's Summer riots. Tell that to the mostly white victims of mostly coloured muggers. Tell that to the parents of the next innocent kid knifed or shot by a drugs gang. Tell that to a pensioner on a waiting list who's paid taxes all his life, whilst immigrants fresh-in get free healthcare, schooling, housing etc.

A few medals may make some people feel good about the bread and circuses going on in London. But don't be blind to the financial and societal mess that 'GB' has become.

This time next year we will still be paying taxes to line the pockets of internationalist financiers.
This time next year we will still be reading of young kids murdered by drugs gangs.
This time next year we will still be aware of how the streets of cities aren't safe at night for the elderly.
This time next year we will still be reading of the hundreds of thousands of Asians and Africans (still) flooding in.

The dust will gather on the medals - but we (the plebs, the proles, the poor sods who make up the indigenous working class) will still be paying far too high a price for the disastrous policies that favour usury and coloured immigration.

Sunday, 22 July 2012

The global elite and big business mafias are running the show. They have special traffic lanes so not to mix with us plebs. They grab the best seats whilst idiots seeking the bread and circus excitement scrabble for tickets. They tell us what we can wear and eat in their Olympic zone.

Meanwhile small businesses, such as bakers and newsagents, are prevented from mentioning the Olympics - even those excited by it and seeking to promote it -for fear of feeling the mailed fist in the velvet glove that the multi-national tax-dodging overlords will bring down on their heads.

Then we come to the "Power of Nightmares." The elites put missiles around London, even on residential buildings. Yet the people they chose to run the 'secutity' couldn't run a "knees up" in a brewery. So in the end we have the government paying soldiers to do what the government already paid G4S to do. It has a pale reflection of the banking crisis about it: multi-nationals fail and the tax-payer is on hand to bail them out!

And on that score why is it the government can find billions of our tax-money to put on a bean-fest for the mega-rich and the elites (with their useful idiots cheering on), whilst throwing people on the dole? The Masonic crew that run the State always find billions to help out their fellow mega-rich, Masonic, internationalist mates.

If you're a nurse in a state/council run nursing home, cleaning up crap for a living on little more than the minimum wage, then you live in fear of cuts. But if you are the boss of a multi-national, tax-dodging, multi-billion pound bank or Olympic-sponsoring big business (with no real loyalty to Britain) then the state will always find billions to help you out!

The cleaners who tidy up the offices of top politicians recently asked for a living wage. They are not alone. People are struggling to pay utility bills, food bills, mortgages... MPs aren't struggling. Nor are the top bankers, QCs, police chiefs and the rest of people who run the show and keep us in our place.

It's time the political class sided with the people and bailed us out, instead of constantly siding with internationalist big businesses who often syphon funds through offshore accounts and who demand cheap wage-slaves come in from the Third World to undercut the wages of the indigenous few.

They could start by outlawing usury (especially "pay day loan" sharks) - including the parasites who rob the poor and bankroll the political parties with the millions they make. All (productive) loans should be capped at a fixed amount. e.g. 5% above the base interest rate. So, you borrow £10, you pay back a fixed amount of circa £10.50. There's a guaranteed profit in that - but no exorbitant rate to wreck businesses and families.

Imagine mortgages fixed in such a way (not to mention Gaddafi style interest-free loans or gifts from the State of farm land etc.) -- it would revolutionise the country, free people from debt and allow them to spend more. It would help us feel much better off. But as it would knock the multi-billion pound profits of the internationalist bankers and rather put multi-billions back into the real economy, don't expect it to happen.

This government, this State, all the political parties, the media, the police, the judiciary and the lawyers -- all are in the pockets of a usury system dependent on heavy taxation. They will not free us from usury or heavy taxation, because they all get crumbs from the table of the Masters of the Universe, and they all meet in their temples, they all have a revolving-door employment policy and so on.

So go cheer the Olympics, which your tax pound has paid for. Just like the circuses of ancient Rome it may take your mind off the corruption and crime for some weeks.

But when the big black limos and armour-plated cars have left the Olympic traffic lanes, we will still be mired in debt, taxation, crime and slavery.

Pageviews last month

The Real Holocaust

Our Freedoms Demand:

Quote of the Week

“Unless people start life with a culture of their own, exposure to other cultures will seldom enhance their moral or even aesthetic awareness. Without home culture, as it used to be called – a background of firmly held standards and beliefs – people will encounter the “other” merely as consumers of impressions and sensations, as cultural shoppers in pursuit of the latest novelties. It is important for people to measure their own values against others and to run the risk of changing their minds; but exposure to others will do them very little good if they have no minds to risk. New perspectives presuppose a pre-existing point of view.”